Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
gazing from the shadows
Joined
·
27,268 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
And I mean that literally.

"Researchers at the University of Calgary have found that nerve cells grown on a microchip can learn and memorize information which can be communicated to the brain. "

Silicon chip/neuron direct interface. Wow! Or maybe Yikes!

Full story here: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/2004/02/19/353584-cp.html

Now, here is a question for discussion, one that need not lead to politics. Try to keep it AWAY from politics. How about keeping it in the realm of ethics and values, and the nature of humanity, huh?

Suppose you could link your brain to a computer. Slowly, the computer matches the neural activity. So when a neuron fires, a silicon switch flips. When the computer switches match exactly the neural patter in your brain, the computer will "think" like you. At this point, you can turn the speed up on the computer. Now it is your brain activity, just WAY faster.

Would you do this?

Would the computer be "you"?

Should the computer have any rights?

If the computer chip had neural tissue on it, would that make a difference?

Is humanity in the hardware, or the software, or both? At what point does the addition of machine to human change the human to not-human? At what point to other, non-human mental processes become sentient beings? Should self aware computers have rights? Should dolphins?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
781 Posts
Already been decided.

It was a huge thing. At Capt. Picard's passionate insistence, Star Fleet agreed that Data was sentinet and had rights. Can't believe you're unaware of this, professor.
 

·
gazing from the shadows
Joined
·
27,268 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
What incredibly sloppy thinking!

RedMenace said:
It was a huge thing. At Capt. Picard's passionate insistence, Star Fleet agreed that Data was sentinet and had rights. Can't believe you're unaware of this, professor.
It clearly has NOT been decided. Your answer might be correct in 500 years (or whatever) but not now.

Also, given the multiple universe theory of quantum mechanics, we cannot know if we are in the universe where Picard won that trial, or lost it. We might be in the "evil Picard" universe. In fact, we cannot know if we are in a Federation universe at all.

So, due to fluctuations in the gravitron matrix, created by a subspace distortion, temporal vortices have destroyed your case. In other words:

Red, the argument, it canna take the strain!!!
 

·
With the Radio On...
Joined
·
965 Posts
A simple 12 part question for an early Friday morn

What time zone are you in? Geeesh.

We'll take the easy one first: Dolphins have rights. As do all of God's creatures.

So the machine is me but faster? It may have copyright type rights. But as a machine, no it won't have rights like dolphins because it can't suffer, even if self-aware, it olny thinks it's suffering, when really it's just a program.

I probably wouldn't do it. I've been told to slow down as it is. And more of me would definately be an ethical question.

Hard to apply curret notions of ethics etc to this b/c machines with brain matter don't fit the current analytical structure. But they would be more like regular tools, I think, than sentient tools. We kill animals for our use, so why not meachines less sentient than our furry friends?

As far as assisting medicine (artificial limbs, sight etc) this is fantastic. I support full cyborg initiatives. As scary as it is, it's inevitable and we should just go fo it full on.

This is all well and good, but I for one will not believe the future has arrived until I get either my gravity defying jet pack or Jetsons style commuter pod.

____________________________________

It's software is hardware
It's heartbeat is time-share
It's midwife's a disc drive
It's sex life is quantised
It's self-perpetuating a parahumanoidarianised

Back to humans
Machines.... -Queen





dr hoo said:
And I mean that literally.

"Researchers at the University of Calgary have found that nerve cells grown on a microchip can learn and memorize information which can be communicated to the brain. "

Silicon chip/neuron direct interface. Wow! Or maybe Yikes!

Full story here: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/2004/02/19/353584-cp.html

Now, here is a question for discussion, one that need not lead to politics. Try to keep it AWAY from politics. How about keeping it in the realm of ethics and values, and the nature of humanity, huh?

Suppose you could link your brain to a computer. Slowly, the computer matches the neural activity. So when a neuron fires, a silicon switch flips. When the computer switches match exactly the neural patter in your brain, the computer will "think" like you. At this point, you can turn the speed up on the computer. Now it is your brain activity, just WAY faster.

Would you do this?

Would the computer be "you"?

Should the computer have any rights?

If the computer chip had neural tissue on it, would that make a difference?

Is humanity in the hardware, or the software, or both? At what point does the addition of machine to human change the human to not-human? At what point to other, non-human mental processes become sentient beings? Should self aware computers have rights? Should dolphins?
 

·
gazing from the shadows
Joined
·
27,268 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
time zone?

Central. Plus I wake up between 5 and 5:30, and usually spend an hour or so typing to get my mind going and my fingers loose. Then a few more hours typing in the office before my first class. I usally start with a bit of news surfing and a visit here.

It really is the only time I get when I KNOW I won't be interrupted. It is also good creative time for me. Afternoons are for editing.
 

·
waterproof*
Joined
·
41,611 Posts
And I mean that literally.

"Researchers at the University of Calgary have found that nerve cells grown on a microchip can learn and memorize information which can be communicated to the brain. "

Silicon chip/neuron direct interface. Wow! Or maybe Yikes!

Full story here: Canoe Tech | Videos & Photos – News – Video Games – Mobile – Reviews – How to

Now, here is a question for discussion, one that need not lead to politics. Try to keep it AWAY from politics. How about keeping it in the realm of ethics and values, and the nature of humanity, huh?

Suppose you could link your brain to a computer. Slowly, the computer matches the neural activity. So when a neuron fires, a silicon switch flips. When the computer switches match exactly the neural patter in your brain, the computer will "think" like you. At this point, you can turn the speed up on the computer. Now it is your brain activity, just WAY faster.

Would you do this?

Would the computer be "you"?

Should the computer have any rights?

If the computer chip had neural tissue on it, would that make a difference?

Is humanity in the hardware, or the software, or both? At what point does the addition of machine to human change the human to not-human? At what point to other, non-human mental processes become sentient beings? Should self aware computers have rights? Should dolphins?
great topic, one of my favorite themes in sci-fi and now rapidly becoming part of realit.

my personal suspicion is that the concept of "human rights" will gradually be rendered irrelevant by an interlocking web of "contracts" ... so that whether the participant is a computer program or a human is of no consequence; both are simply actors in a rule-based system.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top